If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Once a bill is introduced it must be acted on during the current Legislative session or it dies and has to be reintroduced. In SC the Legislative session is 2 years so the present session does not end until around the end om May 2012. This bill has passed the Judiciary subcommittee. It will now have to pass the full committee (scheduled for Tuesday) and the to the full House. After that it will then have to basically start all over in the Senate with the same process. If the Senate passes it with any changes then those changes will have to go back to the House or to a joint committee to be worked out. It is possible that this could be worked out by this years adjournment date in May but if not then it will be next year.

Just a guess but I would say that the earliest that this could become law would be June of 2011. Otherwise it will be June 2012 or everything will have to start over from scratch.

Again, I apologize if the facts don't support anyone's opinion. Please read and take action.

I agree with GrassRoots GunRights on this. I just sent emails to everyone on the Judiciary Committee letting them know this is unacceptable and the bill needs to be sent back to subcommittee. I am about to call and leave voice-mails, then follow-up with everyone Monday to make sure they got my message and to remind them that “GrassRoots GunRights speaks for me".

"With all due respect the leadership of Grassroots Gunrights are not being honest with their membership.
The amendment and bill increase gunowners rights not limits them.

Some of the amendments grassroots gunrights wanted had no support from the subcommittee.

We can take an all or nothing approach, but the bill will be dead. This bill as amended will allow legal gunowners to carry more places without a permit. If that is not increasing gunrights I do not know what is; its unfortunate that this bill is being distributed that it takes away when it only adds.

Thanks.
Thad"

While I agree with SC Grassroots, I don't want all or nothing. I don't want out-of-state, non CWP licensed, people to not be able to travel through SC and not be able to have a gun, though.

As you see from the reply, Viers states Grassroots Gunrights "are not being honest with their membership". I am not sure why he would say that or think that. Could Grassroots Gunrights be over-exaggerating? Could Viers just be trying to push what he thinks will pass, as good intentions? I don't know.

I hope this all works out for the best. I know I will keep trying my best to help voice that I want our constitutional 2nd amendment right.

That sounds like Grassroots! The reason that I won't support them is because of their attitude and the fact that every time they put out something it's always the NRA's fault. Prime example is a certain belittling attitude and inability to accept anything other that Grassroots diatribe that finds it's way in this forum. This bill as it is will most likely pass and we will be better off for it. Things that have been removed will come up again and have a better chance being passed. Chipping away will produce more results than trying to cram everything down their throats at once!

USAF Retired, CATM, SC CWP, NH NR CWP, NRA BenefactorTo preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them... -- Richard Henry Lee, 1787

Why not just get our OC rights only for now as that seems to be the hot topic everywhere. That alone WITH A PERMIT as Ga and Tn are. Afterwards we could chip away with others. As Georgia did with SB308 this past year. We would gain a great right with carrying in hot and sweaty SC along with avoiding non resident issues. Just my opinion, but sounds like a practical gain and avoiding all theses other issues for now.

[quoteE=Red Hat;185474]That sounds like Grassroots! The reason that I won't support them is because of their attitude and the fact that every time they put out something it's always the NRA's fault. Prime example is a certain belittling attitude and inability to accept anything other that Grassroots diatribe that finds it's way in this forum. This bill as it is will most likely pass and we will be better off for it. Things that have been removed will come up again and have a better chance being passed. Chipping away will produce more results than trying to cram everything down their throats at once![/quote]

I am not an all or nothing kind of guy, but this has turned into a bad bill, if I'm reading it correctly. If a bill maintains the status quo in some areas and makes improvements in others, however modest, then there is no problem. The problem comes when freedoms that we once had are then given up. H 3292 does this in a HUGE way. Unlicensed non-residents will be forbidden from having a loaded gun in the glove box, which is now legal. In fact, unlicensed non residents can't even TOUCH a loaded pistol anywhere just because they live in another state. This is a giant leap backwards.

I think this is an oversight, not an intentional freedom restricting aspect of the bill. Little good that will do when some peaceable guy is thrown in jail. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" will be the neocon battle cry.

So that's why I'd have to vote against it. Because I live in Fl and have a CWP I wouldn't have to worry, but I love freedom and liberty for its own sake and am dismayed when I see it needlessly and ridiculously lost.

Of course, even if H 3292 passes, there are many chances for it to be amended before it goes to the governor.

Got a return email from Mr Pitts, the main sponsor. He said unlicensed non residents would still be able to have the loaded gun in a glove box and so other private property too. Don't know how he knows this but he knows better than me I'm sure. Non residents will need a permit to carry on their person.

The problem comes when freedoms that we once had are then given up. H 3292 does this in a HUGE way. Unlicensed non-residents will be forbidden from having a loaded gun in the glove box, which is now legal. In fact, unlicensed non residents can't even TOUCH a loaded pistol anywhere just because they live in another state. This is a giant leap backwards.

I have heard this, but "IF" I'm looking at the right bill I can't see how this is true. Can someone PLEASE tell me where the new ammendment does this?